All's quiet on the Alphasim front?

[centuryseries]

Not that anyone needs to report to the consumers, but we've never been given the full story on this project that was once eagerly awaited by many. I offered up predictions about the C-17 just for fun from time to time and annoyed Alphasim workers showed up to chastize me for it,; much of my speculation turned out true in many ways.

Walker, that just sums up one of the reasons why I don't bother reading these forums very often. You've stirred up your fair share of misinformation over the months including reporting the C-17s demise!

They have never tried the "release part now, part later" idea, so no one really has any right to make any assumptions that they will not deliver the VC.

I'm sure those involved want the completed article out there already!

 

[Nick C]

Certainly, no way would I ever buy an exterior model for $30 or $40 with a promise that the rest is on the way. The exterior of a $30 model for $10 though? I'd consider it, if I could use it. Then again, I'm not your typical customer, either.

I'd certainly agree that paying the full amount for an unfinished model would be ludicrous, but if a low cost external model can be used as AI, for example, then fine. But if a customer is simply purchasing a model because they love the aircraft, there seems little point (IMO) if the vast majority of the parts that make it unique are missing.

I should also point out that I wasn't keen on that Captain Sim bird that used the F-18 VC.

 

[warchild]

Personally, with the advent of superior freeware releases available, i dont see the logic or rational behind a low end market. The high end market will always be just that, high end, and high priced. I've listened to people whine and groan about ariane's pricing for years, and now, PMDG is pricing their new md-11 the same as ariane does with their 737s. High end is meant to push boundaries. it takes flight sim places it's never gone, kinda like driving one of those 3 million dollar sports cars. most people dont have 3 million for a car, and they certainly dont have a hundred bucks for an airplane. Most people live in that middle region, what we call the middle market. They own fords and chevys, cessnas and pipers, but everyone dreams of a warbird or a jet.

I look at what Lionheart did with the Eclipse, and i'm amazed. It looks fantastic, it flys fantastic ( even better than my own, but he's got a lot more experience at it than i do ). There is no reason in the world that we cant offer people really good looking, great flying aircraft. you dont need the systems for it to fly right. you only need to do the work with a pencil and paper ( and theres a plethora of extremely intellegent and knowlegeable people right here that can do flight dynamics in their dreams ) and spend a little talent in photoshop ( if your fortunate enough to have the talent ).
Yes, i wish AS would return to the middle market it's where they have always excelled, but i'm among those who also will not by a partial airplane. I did that with the CS-727 and have regretted it ever since.

By the way. Has anyone seen my signature? it seems to have run away. please PM me if you run across it..

 

[warchild]

Well, speaking as the simplest man on the planet I'm not a hardcore flyer...kind of jump in and go, most of the time. I enjoy that the switches work and do things, but the only plane that I do enjoy all the bells 'n whistles on is the IRIS F-14D.

Odie!! i love ya

 

[empeck]

I agree with Nick too. I won't buy half finished product. I don't understand products like those - for example CaptainSim's Hornet and F-117 exteriors, it's ridiculous.

I don't buy too much payware products lately, I don't have that much money to buy everything is out there. When I'll spend some money for an aircraft it has to be a simulation of a plane, not a nice exterior with not functional VC. My favourites I have are 377 with Accusim and CaptainSim's C-130. I'm waiting for SuperBug and Dodosim's Huey too.

 

[IanP]

Ariane, for a single B737 with panel, sounds and a single model, you can be looking at well over £100 all in. PMDG at the top end are about half that, in the case of the B747 pack for a number of models, which isn't really comparable IMO. Ariane still price themselves out of a massive part of the market and annoy people away from them for a large part of those who can afford it!

Unfortunately we don't have the freeware to replace the low-to-mid end of the market, either. Off the top of my head I can think of a single WW2 combat aircraft available freeware (Edit: Make that three... still not many) and three modern combat aircraft. That's hardly filling the void that just one company used to fill with an extensive back catalogue of not brilliant, but perfectly usable, models.

I assume you mean the F-117, Nick? I agree that using the Hornet VC in that was probably a bad decision, but I fly the F/A-18D from the same pack, using the same VC, far more than I fly the Accel F/A-18. I also know a lot of people that do the same for various reasons. They paid, like I did, for the Hornet D and totally ignore the F-117.

 

[Henry]

oh no Henry not aimed at you at all matey,

i didnt mean to assume you did if thats what it looks like to you
i know you did not
and ignore the scenery bit
back to topic i would not pay for a half finished project
either.
if its middle market and finished then i know exactly what i am getting
i appreciate updates and tweaks thats customer support
but buy now and get the rest later seems a bit off!
the question from me is what is top of the line?
is it a Rolls Royce that i cannot drive, i guess if i owned one
i could afford a chauffeur :isadizzy:
H

 

[tigisfat]

Okay, if we're going to talk about high end versus middle products.

I'm sure we can all agree that something like the 'flight deck' series represents the low-end market, right?

I think quite a few developers are confused as to which market their products fall under, but they bear no reservations about pricing. Virtually every payware product we've seen released of late has been advertised as 'high end' and doesn't deliver. The Captainsim C-130 is high end. There are few high end releases out there, to be exact. Everyone thinks they should be able to charge 50 dollars for their products, too.

Don't release a product with crap all around and tell me it's 'middle market' for 30-40 dollars. 30-40 dollars is not middle market just because developers are always trying to outprice each other. The market will support what the market will support, and there are no developers getting rich these days. There is no 'budget' or 'basic' FDE either. There may be less detailed VCs and exteriors, but it either flies like the real thing or not.

Alphasim did not release middle market aircraft. They released aircraft priced for the high end market and occasionally angered a few people in the meantime with problems.

@ A2A and a few others: You say over and over again that people complain because your products are "too realistic". You're putting a positive spin on the complaints. I've been around for quite a few sessions where people have complained about accusim, and I've never once heard that things were "too realistic". It's quite to the contrary. Some efforts have only served to make things harder. I loved your awesome crew sounds and other effects, but having engines waiting to blow up at any moment is not realistic at all. Please don't tell me that I need to read the manual or that I don't know what I'm talking about like has been done before. I'm a professional pilot who's flown a few vintage aircraft in his day.

 

[warchild]

the question from me is what is top of the line?
is it a Rolls Royce that i cannot drive, i guess if i owned one
i could afford a chauffeur :isadizzy:
H

THAT, is an extremely good, and difficult to answer question. I believe this would be a gret topic for another thread, as there IS an un-written standard that is more a gentlemans agreement, on what is top of the line, but it's a pretty loose and subjective one..

 

[tigisfat]

.....You've stirred up your fair share of misinformation over the months including reporting the C-17s demise!.....

I didn't report it, I guessed that it'd never see the light of day. Seeing as it's still not completed, I haven't been proven wrong yet.

 

[tigisfat]

This thread has most likely strayed off topic now (I didn't read all the posts), but to answer Colin's initial question;

That wasn't the original topic either.

 

[IanP]

Unfortunately, Tigisfat, you have once again proven how little you know about this hobby and its history.

Alphasim was built on very reasonably priced, perfectly usable, aircraft with default levels of complexity. As has already been discussed here and elsewhere, they tried to move to what a particularly vocal group of people on their forum wanted and that move has not proved successful. What it has proven, once again, is that those who shout loudest are usually a minority of the userbase. Those who got what they wanted tend to be using it, not complaining about it.

 

[tigisfat]

Your probably right, but as the models are not aimed at the FS market they surely cannot be included in the calculation.

Well, I was mentioning their model production in all markets as evidence that they can be trusted to deliver more than another company. Flight sim developers often take their time. The commercial 3D market waits for noone.

.....Sadly offering up predictions for 'fun' (right or wrong) isnt seen as funny by opposing parties, its seen as poking the tiger, knowing full well it cannot bite or scratch back, I understand what your trying to achieve but these forums are not the place to do it, .......

The tiger bites and scratches all the time, and it also has predominant control and preferential visitation from this website.

This is the exact place to talk about products in all manners. This is the social center of military flight simming. Noone wants to insult or hurt anyone's feelings, but just because developers come here too doesn't mean that the odd bad review or bit of speculation shouldn't be given.

All that is effectively being achieved is bombardment of the innocent hive workers who try to co-exist here

I wouldn't take it as bombardment or personal. Only rarely do I see personal comments around here. You're one of the good ones, Michael, but not all developers are nice or even around to better this hobby.

its just that the current situation seems so bloody painfull to developers, consumers and innocents that simply browse the boards.

That's because the last few years has seen people grow very bitter. Developing for this hobby is now a viable commercial enterprise, and I'm sure every consumer here has had a bad taste in their mouth from one purchase or another. Further, I'll bet most consumers feel that they have been lied to once or twice.

We need guys like you running the companies at the forefront.

 

[Henry]

Alphasim was built on very reasonably priced, perfectly usable, aircraft with default levels of complexity. As has already been discussed here and elsewhere, they tried to move to what a particularly vocal group of people on their forum wanted and that move has not proved successful. What it has proven, once again, is that those who shout loudest are usually a minority of the userbase. Those who got what they wanted tend to be using it, not complaining about it.

Here here!
thanks
H

 

[DennyA]

Yep, I bought TONS of the Alphasim stuff when it was under $20. I've bought nothing of theirs that cost over $30.

I wouldn't buy a half-finished product. But I'm very likely to buy an under-$20 plane that looks good inside and out, has all the basic instruments (but not serious, FMC-level stuff), and has a convincing flight model. I'm not going to spend $60 on a model with meticulous detail and tons of systems modeled that I won't use, because I'm not going to spend enough time flying it to justify that.

I did buy a couple of AccuSim planes (the B377, etc.) and really enjoy those. But those are the exception, and they handle any desire I have to play engine manager. Usually I want to fly, not twist knobs, and I just need the plane to be realistic enough to immerse me in the flying experience.

 

[tigisfat]

......... delete please. :mixedsmi:

 

[tigisfat]

Unfortunately, Tigisfat, you have once again proven how little you know about this hobby and its history.

Okay, if we're going that route, let's see links showing how I've proven a lack of knowledge. If you can't, then you're just opening your mouth to complain about people complaining. Who's worse?


Alphasim has had some of their best releases go relatively unnoticed, like the Apache longbow. I liked the wording when you said 'default complexity'. That sums it up, and that's what I want. The default 737 isn't simple, so to speak, and it's still very good looking and functional but not full of smoke and mirrors.


Getting back to the REAL original topic, Is Alphasim going to be around for a while still releasing aircraft? Are the winding down? Does anyone know?

 

[IanP]

Alphasim are still present or accounted for as of this time. Beyond that? Well, they haven't been particularly open about their internal status ever, as far as I'm aware, and I've used their products since the company was founded. They certainly haven't closed their door, but if people know, they're not likely to be saying.

Incidentally, my classifications for products wouldn't be specific to payware or freeware and would cover both in the same scheme:

Low end: Very basic. Model with no additional animations other than, say, props, gear and a single door, default gauges, low resolution textures. Basically, you wouldn't want to pay for this but some developers would want you to.

Mid-range: Good external model and paint, custom gauges and/or soundset but default functionality (clickable VC for basic gauges and switches, usable but not stand out).

High-end: Better than default wherever possible (custom gauges and sounds, well modelled, textured VC, custom animations, that sort of thing).

Top-end: Fully functioning systems, very detailed model, custom sound set... PMDG, LDS, Accu-Sim, Captain Sim, that level of complexity.

Edit: If you haven't done the research and want to make yourself look a clown, that's up to you. It's not my job to correct your lack of knowledge, it's yours.

However, because I'm such a nice chap, I'll suggest that:

a) you read Henry and DennyA's responses to my post, both of which prove that Alphasim's high pricing is a comparatively new thing.
b) you go back and check their freeware pages, which are their older commercial packages that they now have chosen to give to the community.
c) you search for discussions of Alphasim products prior to about 2006.

That should give you a reasonable grounding to explain why your statement that "Alphasim did not release middle market aircraft. They released aircraft priced for the high end market and occasionally angered a few people in the meantime with problems." is incorrect.

It would be more accurate as do, but what the did is far different and what many people - myself included - wish that they had stuck with rather than the current mess they have created for themselves. We've also been saying that for years.

Does that make things more clear?

 

[Lewis-A2A]

Tigs the aircraft are built with pilots who help us develop the stuff and help verify what we produce. The 377 treated badly will explode on you, and P47 treated badly will be naughty on you too. The 377 was built with help from a pilot of the type with hundreds of hours and the P47 was built with help from a few people including Dudley who again has many many many hours on the type. Our Beta team has pilots and simmers alike, from the simmer to the tube liner pilots we believe we have one of the best BETA teams in the industry.

I said once that people can sometimes complain about the realism and they do, I stand by it. But these people are happy once I tell them which products we offer for there flavour of flight simming, and Scott will often offer refunds/exchanges for those that want it.
This is EXACTLY why accusim is an option in the first place. The aircraft are fine without it for those that dont want it.
Which leads me back on topic, could this be considered a working and sucessful example of what has previously been discussed re: part releases? I believe we have managed to cater for two different groups with two products that are essentially one.

Alphasim are famous for the middlle market Tig's I think you may want to go back and take a look, they provided cheap products for the masses and were really good at it and very well respected for it overall, with people like Micheal creating some really good stuff for them.

 

[michael davies]

Well I did post this afternoon but its gone, either admin removed it (it wasn't inflammatory) or the forum ate it, needless to say things have moved on but in condensed format here goes.

I agree with Lewis, Alphasim should go back to middle market, to clarify that a little better, middle market is default +25-35%

Dan is also right, Alphasim did get beat for middle market in the past.

Alphasim has erred in the past, price, description, quality, customer care which ever you choose, I'm not here to defend that (for either party), those issues need to be taken to the correct parties, if thats me then PM me please. I have and will still jump in if I think a position has been taken on information that isn't correct, offer what I believe to be the correct information and allow the other party to either revise their view or continue with their existing view, but it is still their view and I will never argue that.

Part models, I have my own views, they do not always align with others, even if I worked on a product.

IanP is correct Alphasim built up a big user base when military aircraft were not the norm, they did take council from others, with hindsight it may not have been the right council.

Warchild's / Henry's, comments on what defines a product (IanP has voiced above a good starting point) is a good point for a diverging thread, for the community to co-exist in the future then some sort of generalized guideline needs to be agreed as to what is middle market, high market etc, price is not always reflective of market position these days. Whether the standard is adopted by developers will need to be seen but if adopted by consumers will soon force developers to follow suit, the recent discussions re FSx ready or port over is a good example of users defining what developers should follow, with tact and discretion end users have more power than they perhaps realise, make it work for you !, developers who care about the community will listen.

Tigisfat, I understand what your saying, trust me companies don't want me running them, I'm a useless business man, too soft . The problem with Alphasim is that its primarily a collective, yet it is rarely the collective that is at fault, even though the forum is a social event if someone has an issue with the collective then yes the forum is the correct place, if they have a problem with the singular then it should rightly be taken up privately or if taken up publicly then written so that the collective do not assume its aimed at them. An analogy, if the tables were reversed would see me making SoH accountable for your actions, does that make sense ?, hope so, no offense intended. Regarding Milviz bringing products to market, quite a few models were brought to market through Alphasim (IRIS and Razbam too), who gets the credit there ?, Milviz for the model or the other developers for doing the (then) FS conversion work.

Middle market, I strongly believe there is a market here, a market just above default, bespoke sounds, a believable FDE but not necessarily accurate to within 1% of the real deal, 10-15% would be a good base line ?. A good external model and well modeled VC, not too poly heavy or too poly frugal (100-125,000 poly for each), for example a middle market VC would have textured panel screws, where as a high end would have 3D modeled one, textures should 2048. There are already developers in this arena and they do really need more exposure and perhaps encouragement as it seems that this area actually forms a large percentage of users, mostly satisified and generally quiet. for it to suceed it will need to try and move past the 'toy' label that has perhaps unfairly been applied in the past.

Growing pains (tigisfat) yes it has been a rocky road these last two years, mid way through FS9 the FS scene grew at an astonishing rate, developers scrabbled to catch up and meet demand, but like the global economy its fallen flat on its face, mistakes were made but the strong will survive. People are more frugal with their money, more particular about what they buy or where they shop.

Ok enough, what was condensed has expanded as I rambled on, my apologies.